1. CHAPTER 8 UTTERANCE MEANING
Dr. Ho Ngoc Trung

2. Chapter Outline 8.1 Context and Cotext 8.2 Utterance 8.3 Speech acts
8.4 Entailment and presuppositioin
8.5 Implicature

3. 8.1 Context and Cotext
One cannot understand any phenomenon apart from the setting in which it is found, its context.
In Linguistics, the term “context” may be said to consist of two components: the linguistic context (cotext) and the situational or extralinguistic context.
COTEXT refers to the text surrounding a message. This includes the textual elements that occur before and/or after a word, a phrase or even a longer utterance or a text. The cotext often helps in understanding the particular meaning of the word, phrase, etc.
E.g. The word ‘loud’ in ‘loud music’ is usually understood as meaning ‘noisy’ whereas in ‘a tie with a loud pattern’, it is understood as ‘unpleasantly colourful’.

4. 8.1 Context and Cotext
Situational CONTEXT concerns the physical context in which a message is conveyed. It is the broader social situation in which a linguistic item is used.
E.g. In ordinary usage, ‘spinster’ refers to an older unmarried woman, in a legal context it refers to any unmarried woman.
CONTEXT, therefore, includes not only the COTEXT but also the relevant features of the situation in which a sentence is uttered.
Context can determine utterance meanings in 3 ways:
What sentence is uttered
What proposition has been actually expressed
What kind of illocutionary force has been assigned to the proposition

5. 8.2 Utterances
The term ‘utterance’ can be used in two difference senses.
In the process sense, utterances are now known as speech acts.
In the product sense, utterances are referred to as inscriptions, the verbal records of utterances.
e.g. I would like to thank all of you for your help.
In the process sense, uttering this sentence is considered as the act of thanking.
In the product sense, the utterance “I would like to thank you all for your help” is the verbal record of the act of uttering this sentence.

6. Meaning of Utterance
Utterances
Performative
Constative

7. Performative Utterances
A performative utterance is one that actually describes the act that it performs, i.e. it perform some act and simultaneously describes that act.
e.g. “I promise to pay you tomorrow” is performative because in saying it the speaker actually does what the utterance describes, i.e. He promises to repay the hear the next day. That is the utterance both describes and is a promise.
A typical performative utterance usually contains the first person pronoun “I”, followed by a certain type of verb in the present tense. (e.g. I promise ..., I congratulate..., I admit ...). These are all verbs describing speech acts. We classify them as “performative verbs”.
e.g.: apologize, authorize, condemn, pronoun, declare, name, object, name, plead...

8. Performative Utterances
Explicit
Primary
(non-explicit)
make explicit the kind of act that is being performed
contain a V denoting the act performed
e.g.: I thank you for loving me.
make implicit the kind of act that is being performed
e.g.: We owed our lives to the skills of the pilots.

9. Constative utterances
A constative utterance is one which makes an assertion, i.e it is often the utterance of a declarative sentence, but is not performative.
e.g. “I am trying to get this box open with a screwdriver.” is a constative utterance because it makes an assertion about a particular state of affairs, but is not performative, i.e. the utterance does not simultaneously describe and perform the same act.

10. Performative vs. Constative
Performative utterance
Constative utterance
Definition
Action-performing utterance
Statement-making utterance
Truth value
neither true nor false
either true or false
Function
make part of the world conform to what is said
represent a state of affair or experience
Example
I sentence you to death.
He is the most famous businessman in the world.

11. 8.3 Speech Acts
A speech act is an act that a speaker performs when making an utterance.
A speech act, then, is best described as “in saying something, we DO something”, such as when a minister say, “I now pronounce you husband and wife”.
In speech act theory, utterances have two kinds of meaning:
Propositional meaning (also known as locutionary meaning). This is the basic literal meaning of the utterance which is conveyed by the particular words and structures which the utterance contains.
Illocutionary meaning (also known as illocutionary force). This is the effect the utterance has on the listener.
e.g. I am thirsty.

12. Speech Acts Locutionary Act Illocutionary Act Perlocutionary Act
According to J.L Austin, a distinction is made in the theory of speech acts between three different types of act involved in or caused by the utterance of a sentence Speech act
Locutionary
Act
Illocutionary
Act
Perlocutionary
Act

13. Locutionary Act
A locutionary act is the saying of something which is meaningful and can be understood. To perform a locutionary act is to produce an utterance with a particular form and a more or less determinate meaning according to the rules of a given language.
Austin further analyses the locutionary act into three sub-types:
Phonic act: the act of producing an utterance in the phonic medium of sound
Phatic act: the act constructing a particular sentence in particular language
Rhetic act: the act contextualizing a sentence.
e.g. Your hands are dirty.

14. Illocutionary Act
An illocutionary act is any speech act that amounts to stating, questioning, commanding, promising and so on. It is an act performed in saying something, as contrasted with a locutionary act, the act of saying something, the locution. In short, an illocutionary act is using a sentence to perform a function.
e.g. Your hands are dirty.
The illocutionary act (or simply the illocution) carried out by a speaker making an utterance is the act viewed in terms of the utterance’s significance within a conventional system of social interaction. Illocutions are acts defined by social conventions, acts such as accusing, admitting, apologizing, giving permission, greeting, leavetaking, naming, offering, praising, promising, protesting ...

15. Illocutionary Force
The illocutionary force is roughly the speaker’s intention behind the production of an illocutionary act, including its communicative point, attitudes involved, and presuppositions. In other words, the Illocutionary force is some kind of intended message that a speaker assigns to the sentence he utters.
e.g. We thank you for all your support.
I promise not to be late again.
Some utterances’ illocutionary force is less obvious.
e.g. It’s cold in here.
Do you think you carry this bag for me?

16. Perlocutionary act
The perlocutionary act (or just simply the perlocution) carried out by a speaker making an utterance is the act of causing a certain effect on the hearer and others. In other words, a perlocutionary act is the results or effects that are produced by means of saying something.
e.g. Would you mind closing the window?
If communication is
successful, the illocution
and the perlocution are
alike or nearly alike.

17. Types of speech acts (Austin’s)
Verdictives: typified by the giving of a verdict by a jury, umpire, arbitrator such as acquit, grade, estimate, dignose.
Exercitives: which are the exercising of powers, rights, or influence such as appoint, order, advise, and warn.
Commisives: which commit the speaker to do something, but also include delcarations or announcements of intention such as promise, guarantee, bet, oppose.
Behabitives: a miscellaneous groups concerned with attitudes and social behaviour such as apologies, criticize, bless, challenge.
Expositives: which clarify how utterances fit into ongoing discourse, or how they are being used: argue, postulate, affirm, concede.

18. Types of speech acts (Searl’s)
Commissive: a speech act that commits the speaker to doing something in the future, such as a promise, or a threat.
If you don’t stop fighting, I’ll call the police.
I’ll take you to the movies tomorrow.
Directive: a speech act that has the function of getting the listener to do something, such as a suggestion, a request, or a command.
Please, sit down.
Why don’t you close the window?
Declarative: a speech act which changes the state of affairs in the world.
I now pronounce you man and wife.

19. Types of speech acts (Searl’s)
Expressive: a speech act in which the speaker expresses feelings and attitudes about something, such as apologizing, complaining, thanking, congratulating.
The meal was delicious.
Representative: a speech act which describes states or events in the word, such as an assertion, a claim, a report.
This is a German car.
In addition to the above types, we can add the so-called
Phatic act: a speech act whose function is to establish rapport between people:
Nice to meet you.

20. Felicity conditions
In speech act theory, felicity conditions are the conditions which must be fullfilled for a speech act to be satisfactorily performed or realized. In other words, in order for an utterance to achieve its illocutionary force, certain conditions must be met. These conditions relate to the conversational and situational context and the roles, abilities and beliefs of the speaker and listener.
For example, the felicity conditions necessary for promises are:
a. A sentence is used which states a future act of the speaker
b. The speaker has the ability to do the act.
c. The hearer prefers the speaker to do the act rather than not to do it.
d. The speaker would not otherwise usually do the act.
e. The speaker intends to do the act.

21. Felicity Conditions
Preparatory Conditions - those existing prior to the utterance.
e.g.: for a directive statement to have the force of an order, the person uttering it must have authority over the other person and that person must recognize that authority.
Sincerity Conditions - relate to speaker’s state of mind.
e.g. for a commissive statement to be taken as a promise the speaker must intend to do X.

22. Essential Condition - utterance recognizable as instance of particular illocutionary act
e.g.: for a directive to have the force of a request the hearer must recognize that the speaker is attempting to get the hearer to do X.
Propositional Content Conditions - state of affairs predicated in utterance
e.g.: an expressive that performs the act of congratulating must predicate a past act of the hearer; an expressive that performs the act of apologizing must predicate a past act of the speaker

23. Statements, questions and directives
When a speaker utters a sentence, he expresses not only a proposition but also a particular attitude toward it.
In uttering a statement, a speaker expresses an epistemic commitment, i.e. the speaker commits to the fact that he knows or believes it to be true.
A directive involves a different kind of commitment on the part of the speaker: deontic commitment, which means the speaker imposes somekind of obligation.
In asking a question, a speaker is not committed to the truth or factuality of the proposition expressed by the question but is challenging the truth of a proposition in a yes-no question, or eliciting the variable “x” in an x-question.

24. 8.4 Entailment (revisited)
Entailment is a relationship that applies between two propositions, where the truth of one implies the truth of the other because of the meanings of the words involved. In other words, a sentence (S1) entails another sentence (S2) if and only if whenever S1 is true in a situation, S2 is also true in that situation.
Entailment happens when one set of objects is included in another. It may be seen as a kind of hyponymic relation.
Entailment can also involve the use of determiners. This is simply the relation of inclusion.
e.g. Every student is odd.
Most students are odd.

25. Subtypes of entailment
Assertion
Presupposition

26. Assertion
A declarative sentence typically asserts that a state of affair exists. In other words, assertion is the characteristic of all declarative sentences. However, not all of them have presupposition.
e.g. Mary kicked the dog.
We took our final yesterday.

27. 8.4 Presupposition
Presupposition is the assumption the speaker makes about what the hearer is likely to accept without challenge. In other words, presupposition is what a speaker or writer assumes that the receiver of the message already knows.
e.g. When did you stop beating your donkey?
presupposes:
You stopped beating your donkey.
You did beat your donkey.
You beat something.
You have a donkey.

28. Presupposition
A sentence S1 presupposes another sentence S2 just in case:
S1 entails S2.
The negation of S1 also entails S2.
The questioning of S1 also entails S2.
In other words, if S1 entails S2, then asserting, denying, questioning S2 uncontroversially implies that S2 is true.
e.g. I heard her confessing her love to him.
I didn’t hear her confessing her love to him.
Did you hear her confessing her love to him?
She was confessing her love to him.

29. Assertion vs. presupposition
S1 presupposes S2 → negation of S1 entails S2
(S1) She hates herself for loving you.
She doesn’t hate herself for loving you.
(S2) She loves you.
S1 entails S2 → negation of S1 does not entail S2
(S2) She hates herself.

30. Exercise Determine the presuppositions in the following utterances
1. What did you do with the stolen money?
2. When did you give up smoking?
3. Why did you marry the woman you did not love?
4. I did not smoke today, sir.
5. I regret choosing Semantics 1 as my elective
6. John’s sister missed the lecture on Advertisement yesterday.
7. Smith was not worried about his wife’s hot temper

31. 8.5 Implicature
“Implicature” account for what a speaker can imply, suggest, or mean, as distinct from what the speaker literally says. Implicature is one of the ways in which one proposition can be conveyed by (a speaker uttering) another (under appropriate circumstances).
e.g.: Some of the students are intelligent.
 Not all the students are intelligent.
Utterance meaning + Implicatures = Intended meaning
Implicature can be either conversational implicature or conventional implicature

32. Conversational implicatures
There is a general idea that people involved in a conversation will cooperate with each other. In most cases, the assumption of cooperation is so pervasive that it can be stated as a cooperative principle of conversation and elaborated in four sub-principles called maxims.
Conversational implicatures are the implicatures that derive from the cooperative principle of conversation and a number of maxims expected to be followed by participants in a speech event.
e.g. A. I hope you brought the bread and the cheese.
B. Ah, I brought the bread.

33. The cooperative principle
Make your conversational contribution such as is required, at the stage at which it occurs, by the accepted purpose or direction of the talk exchange in which you are engaged. (Yule, 1996, p.37)
In other words, the listener presumes that the speaker is being cooperative and is speaking truthfully, informatively, relevantly, perspicuously, and appropriately

34. Conversational maxims
The maxims of Quantity
Make your contribution as informative as is required (for the current purposes of the exchange).
Do not make your contribution more informative than is required.
The maxims of Quality
Super-maxim: Try to make your contribution one that is true
Do not say what you believe to be false.
Do not say that for which you lack evidence.

35. Conversational maxims
The maxim of Relation: Be relevant.
4. The maxims of manner
Super-maxim: Be perspicuous
Avoid obscurity of expression.
Avoid ambiguity.
Be brief (avoid unnecessary prolixity).
Be orderly.

36. Conversational maxims
We can use the conversational maxims to generate implicatures by:
Adhering to the maxim
e.g. I’ve run out of petrol.
There’s a garage just round the corner.
Violating a maxim
e.g. Where does John live?
Somewhere in the South of England.
Flouting maxims: Violating a maxim is enforced (usually by clashing maxims). Flouting is deliberate.
e.g. John is John. (flouts Quantity)

37. Conventional Implicature
In contrast to conversational implicatures, conventional implicatures are not based on the cooperative principle or the maxims. They don’t have to occur in conversation and they don’t depend on special contexts for their interpretation. Conventional implicatures are associated with specific words and result in additional conveyed meanings when those words are used.
e.g. Even John came to the party.
He even helped tidy up afterwards.